[Bug 673792] Rename Request: mingw32-runtime -> mingw-crt - MinGW Windows cross-compiler runtime

[bugzilla at redhat.com]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=673792

Kalev Lember <kalevlember at gmail.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |ASSIGNED
                 CC|                            |kalevlember at gmail.com
         AssignedTo|nobody at fedoraproject.org    |kalevlember at gmail.com
               Flag|                            |fedora-review+

--- Comment #7 from Kalev Lember <kalevlember at gmail.com> 2012-02-25 17:32:44 EST ---
Fedora review of mingw-crt-2.0.999-0.4.trunk.20120224.fc18_cross.src.rpm
2012-02-25

+ OK
! needs attention

rpmlint output:

$ rpmlint mingw-crt-2.0.999-0.4.trunk.20120224.fc16.src.rpm \
          mingw32-crt-2.0.999-0.4.trunk.20120224.fc16.noarch.rpm \
          mingw64-crt-2.0.999-0.4.trunk.20120224.fc16.noarch.rpm
mingw-crt.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) runtime -> run time, run-time,
rudiment
mingw-crt.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US runtime -> run time,
run-time, rudiment
mingw32-crt.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) runtime -> run time,
run-time, rudiment
mingw32-crt.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US runtime -> run
time, run-time, rudiment
mingw64-crt.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) runtime -> run time,
run-time, rudiment
mingw64-crt.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US runtime -> run
time, run-time, rudiment
mingw64-crt.noarch: E: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object
/usr/x86_64-w64-mingw32/sys-root/mingw/lib/libwsock32.a
[snip, 1601 similar errors cut out for brevity]
3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1602 errors, 6 warnings.

+ The rpmlint errors / warnings are harmless and can be ignored
+ The package is named according to Fedora MinGW packaging guidelines
+ The spec file name matches the base package name.
+ The package meets the Packaging Guidelines
+ The package is licensed with a Fedora approved license and meets the
  Licensing Guidelines.
+ The license field in the spec file matches the actual license
+ The package contains the license files (COPYING DISCLAIMER DISCLAIMER.PD)
+ Spec file is written in American English
+ Spec file is legible
+ Upstream sources match sources in the srpm. md5sum:
  1223b8f402e1e6296c5b70d63b37d4b0  mingw-w64-src_20120224.tar.bz2
  1223b8f402e1e6296c5b70d63b37d4b0  Download/mingw-w64-src_20120224.tar.bz2
+ The package builds on primary architectures
n/a ExcludeArch bugs filed
+ BuildRequires look sane
n/a The spec file must handle locales properly
n/a ldconfig in %post and %postun
+ Package does not bundle copies of system libraries
n/a Package isn't relocatable
+ Package owns all directories it creates
+ No duplicate files in %files
+ Permissions are properly set
+ Consistent use of macros
+ The package must contain code or permissible content
n/a Large documentation files should go in -doc subpackage
+ Files marked %doc should not affect package
n/a Header files should be in -devel
  Not applicable to MinGW packages.
n/a Static libraries must be in -static
n/a Development files must be in a -devel package
  Not applicable to MinGW packages.
n/a -devel must require the fully versioned base
+ Packages must not contain libtool .la files
n/a Packages containing GUI apps must include %{name}.desktop file
+ Directory ownership sane
+ Filenames are valid UTF-8
+ Proper Obsoletes / Provides for replacing mingw32-runtime

Looks good.

APPROVED

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.